Virginia’s Soft-on-Crime Parole Board Releasing Another Killer

by Kerry Dougherty

Perfect timing. Just as Terry McAuliffe is set to announce another run for governor, Virginia’s pathetic parole board, full of Governor Ralph Northam’s and McAuliffe’s soft-on-crime appointees, is releasing a strangler.

This one is a real sweetheart.

On May 15, 1988 Gregory Joyner murdered 15-year-old Sarah Jamison after attempting to rape the Lynchburg teenager. He buried her in a shallow grave near her parents’ home where she was unearthed a couple of weeks later.

According to news reports, Joyner confessed to killing the girl, but said sex between the two was consensual. In June of 1989 he was sentenced to life plus 10 years for his grotesque crimes. According to an April 6, 1989 story in the Staunton News-Leader, prosecutors initially planned to charge him with capital murder, but couldn’t prove rape.

Now, just 31 years later, the 48-year-old murderer is set to be freed. According to news reports, the board in 2017 and 2019 refused to release him, citing Joyner’s “extensive criminal record,” a “history of violence,” and “the serious nature and circumstances of his offense.” Releasing Joyner would “diminish the seriousness of the crime” of which he was convicted, the board concluded.

That was then. This is now.

In a sudden about-face, the five-member parole board decided in November that it was time to turn Joyner loose from the Augusta Correctional Center.

Remember when Democrats claimed to care about women?

The board, which is required to release its list of parole decisions monthly, has not yet published Joyner’s name.

It was Lynchburg’s Commonwealth’s Attorney, Bethany Harrison, who raised the alarm yesterday after she was notified of the board’s decision. She released the following statement:

“My heart goes out to Sarah’s family, as they have been forced into a lifetime of reliving the pain and trauma that Gregory Joyner caused them,” she said.

“They experienced the rigors of trial and were granted some relief at his conviction and sentence to life in prison. Now the family must experience a new trauma. That is knowing that at 48 years old, Joyner will once again be free to walk the streets of the Commonwealth while they will never enjoy the company of their loved one again.

“A life sentence should have given this family the closure they deserved. Instead, a wound has been reopened by the Virginia Parole Board. We will never know the reasons why the Virginia Parole Board granted Joyner parole as they are not required to give the public reasons for the release of a murderer. Given the multitude of problems victims of crime have suffered at the hands of this parole board this year, transparency and accountability are needed.”

Sarah’s family reacted angrily at the news and asked the governor to intervene to keep Joyner behind bars. Her father, Dell Jamison, spoke to WDBJ Channel 7 News:

“When Joyner murdered Sarah it was for life. Why should he be released after only serving a part of his life? His sentence was for punishment, not rehabilitation; therefore he still has 30 or 40 years left on his sentence. His release is a big mistake. He is also a registered sex offender. If he was sentenced today, he would never get out of prison.

 Joyner has not expressed remorse to my knowledge. When he was photographed going to trial for the murder and rape of Sarah, he smiled and said ‘get my good side.’ He needs to stay in prison for the good of the community.”

House Republican leader Todd Gilbert quickly issued a statement Tuesday reminding the public that Virginia’s inspector general just a few months ago found the parole board in violation of its own rules during its springtime freeing frenzy of convicted killers.

 “This Board has already been found to have violated both law and procedure in letting such killers walk free. They stand for the interests of violent criminals, not victims and their families. It has become increasingly clear that the Northam administration and the House Democratic caucus not only condone these actions but also intend to continue to help hide the illegal and unethical behavior of this Parole Board,” Gilbert said. “The best time for Governor Northam to have fired this board was when they released their first unrepentant killer. The second best time is right now.”

Gilbert’s right.

The entire parole board should be fired.

Joyner should stay in prison and the Jamison family should be given a sincere apology from the two men who appointed these dolts to the parole board.

This column was published with permission from Kerry: Unemployed & Unedited.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

67 responses to “Virginia’s Soft-on-Crime Parole Board Releasing Another Killer”

  1. It’s almost as if Virginia’s elites and dregs have allied themselves in a war on middle-class people and everything they believe in.

    1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      Yeah, like the sanctity of elections.

      1. Steve Haner Avatar
        Steve Haner

        Yeah, we should just pass a bill to let prison inmates vote, and then the Democrats would leave them locked up…..

        1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
          Nancy_Naive

          Well, that could work. But then, they’d be Republicans.

      2. “Yeah, like the sanctity of elections.” NN

        Indeed. Democrats need to respect the will of legal voters rather than trying to overturn election results using their slim majority in the House.

        “Democrats are challenging the results in two close House elections in Iowa and New York — and are represented by Marc Elias, the same attorney who led the party’s nationwide efforts to expand vote-by-mail.”

        “According to multiple reports, the Democrats plan to appeal to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the House Administration Committee to certify at least one of the candidates as the winners — even if the Republican candidate appears to have more votes as counted by state election authorities.”

        “Under the Federal Contested Elections Act, the House can step in and certify a winner in close and contested races. The Democrats last did so in 1985, when the House Administration Committee declared Rep. Frank McCloskey (D-IN) the winner of a close race in which his Republican challenger, Richard McIntyre, was certified as the winner by state election authorities. Democrats used their House majority to seat McCloskey and Republicans walked out of the chamber in protest.”

        https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/12/05/democrats-represented-by-marc-elias-try-to-overturn-two-house-elections-pelosi/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

        1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
          Nancy_Naive

          You’re right Nate. Let’s go with the Texas AG. Let’s toss those 4 states. Nobody gets those votes. This leaves the number of electoral votes to win as

          (538 – 20 -16 – 16 – 10)/2 = 238

          How many does Trump currently have from the remaining states? 232. Oopsy.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            Steve is an election worker. I think you should ask Steve if he thinks there is a way for an election to be perverted at the precinct level. I’d like to hear his answer also.

          2. As I have stated before, the most important consideration is not the outcome of one election, though that is very important. The problems with this election must be highlighted, acknowledged and rectified for future elections. Problems won’t go away by hiding them under a barrel and pretending they don’t exist.

            And what the Democrats are doing in with regard to Iowa and New York demonstrates that they are willing to do anything to win elections. Their moral posturing is a load of crap.

          3. I heartily recommend reading primary sources such as the actual lawsuit filed with the Supreme Court linked above, but if you are interested in a shorter synopsis of what lead to this, here’s an article to read.

            There is no “Election Month” in the Constitution

            https://uncoverdc.com/2020/12/09/there-is-no-election-month-in-the-constitution/

          4. “Importantly, the Texas lawsuit presents a pure question of law. It is not dependent upon disputed facts. Although these unconstitutional changes to the election rules could have facilitated voter fraud, the State of Texas doesn’t need to prove a single case of fraud to win. It is enough that the four states violated the Constitution.”

            https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/07/kobach-texas-case-challenges-election-directly-at-supreme-court/

          5. LarrytheG Avatar

            Well aware Nathan and it’s going nowhere.

            IF there is actually a problem, why has it not been addressed before now?

            And if there is a problem, then we should reform.

            But we’re not going to throw out the results of the elections.

            That ship has sailed despite those who won’t believe it.

    2. Transparency is the key. The more citizens know, the greater the likelihood of accountability.

      But information needs to be both available and easily accessible to the general public. It shouldn’t require a FOIA request to get this information.

      Here are some thoughts about potentially useful information. Is this kind of information available anywhere?

      -Stats on all who have received parole and percent who have committed crimes while on parole (with details of crimes committed)

      -Stats on those issued bond and percent who have committed crimes while out on bond (with details of crimes committed)

      -Stats on those issued pardons and percent who have subsequently committed crimes (with details of crimes committed)

      -Details of previous criminal history of everyone convicted of murder. Might sniffer penalties or some other intervention have potentially saved lives?

      For example, remember this? What’s the track record for these people and those pardoned by other governors?

      “Virginia’s McAuliffe to announce restoration of voting rights to 13,000 felons”

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/virginias-mcauliffe-to-announce-restoration-of-voting-rights-to-13000-felons/2016/08/20/590b43ee-6652-11e6-96c0-37533479f3f5_story.html

  2. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    Sarah was just a 15 year old kid. Last picture taken before prom. Strangled to death. You have to look at your victim in the eye to kill in this way.
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/lynchburg-family-asks-for-governor-to-intervene-in-parole-decision/ar-BB1bKSkl?fullscreen=true#image=1

  3. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    The Virginia Democratic Party’s most important constituencies are illegal immigrants and criminals. And they are extremely PO’d that 1 out of every 6 black men voted for Trump. A sizable number of Hispanic Americans and Americans of the Muslim faith.

  4. LarrytheG Avatar

    I’m trying to understand how someone who committed a crime like this – ever deserves to be paroled. Of all the complaints against Northam , this one is legitimate and I do not understand what the hell is going on with the parole board or Northam.

    This will, justifiably, hurt the Dems in Virginia. When you have folks who lean Dem see this, it changes minds.

  5. djrippert Avatar

    If the crime occurred in 1988 and the offender is 48 now I think that made him 16 at the time of the murder. Yes, it’s still a heinous and horrible crime but shouldn’t 16 year olds, even 16 year old murderers, have some chance at rehabilitation? What has he done while incarcerated? Do he now express remorse for his actions?

    One thing for sure – the parole board should be forced into a much more transparent process regarding releases. They should be forced to write the equivalent of a Supreme Court opinion as to why they are freeing a serious criminal. But “the Virginia Way” is nothing if not opaque. Heaven forbid our betters be asked to explain their actions – whether it is a parole board releasing a murderer or a governor imposing COVID-19 restrictions.

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      SCOTUS ruled that a mandatory life without parole for an offender under 18 constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Life sentences for these offenders must include the possibility of parole. However, that does not mean the state must grant parole.

      Given the parole board’s earlier findings about the convict, what magic happened to rehabilitate him in one year? Just more Democrats taking care of their important convicted criminal constituency.

      1. djrippert Avatar

        You may be right. I am suspicious of this action. However, something about the numbers quoted in the article seemed off. I realized that 1988 was a long time ago and the killer is only 48 right now. That’s what was bothering me.

        The parole board should be forced to justify its decisions for the public record. People should not have to guess why a murderer was freed.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          We agree on the lack of transparency. The complete record should be made available AND a public comment period for the victims and prosecuters. – All in one place.

          It’s a terrible thing to think someone would spend their entire life in a prison. In some respects, that IS inhumane but to have these people loose in society to kill and harm others is even less humane.

          But here is something that reflects on us as a society:

          https://i.imgur.com/URF0r7E.png

    2. LarrytheG Avatar

      I did not catch that and was led to believe that he had ” extensive criminal record,” a “history of violence,”

      So did he or not?

      I’m sure if Kerry said so, it’s true, right?

      1. djrippert Avatar

        He might have had a history of violence as a juvenile or he may have been violent in prison. When government entities like the parole board operate in darkness you just never know.

      2. Maybe Mr. Joyner was a “junior achiever”…

      3. Enjoy your sarcasm, Larry. The information about his “extensive criminal record” was a direct quote from the parole board’s comments at the time. Are you unaware that juveniles can have extensive criminal records?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          No. I know some do but I would like to know what it was other than “extensive”. Was it before prison? In prison, bad stuff can happen to people who do not want violence but have little choice sometimes.

          If this guy had a violent record prior to prison – then no sympathy at all .. the principal crime was bad enough.

          I’m agreeing with you Kerry. The parole board has gone rogue.

          1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            And who says his record was violent? Stealing hubcaps?

          2. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            I think you’re dancing around the elephant in the room, Larry.
            16-year old boy rapes (conceded by me, unproven in court) and kills 15-year old in Virginia in late 1900s.

            Willing to bet $1 that, while uncommon, it ain’t as rare as hen’s teeth, and that these highly talented “opinion writers” could find maybe half dozen similar cases between, oh say, 1970 and 2000. More, if you let the ages wander +/- a bit.

            The question is, how many were tried as adults, and how many received such extensive sentences? How many have since been released? Had sentences reduced? Convictions overturned because of their age? Etc., etc.

            Then, too, a quick look at the perpetrator’s and victim’s photos lends a bit of a clue, too.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            Consistency in sentencing? Perhaps. It would help enormously if the full record of the guy as well as the proceedings of the parole board were available because the way this comes across – without that information – is arbitrary and capricious and it just plain looks wrong.

          4. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            Sentencing? Sure. But, even before sentencing, there was a decision to move from juvenile to adult court. These people (white conservatives and red queens) are a bloodthirsty lot and beginning about 1970 have sought to execute juveniles for crimes of this nature. “Life sentences for 12-year olds? Sure, but can’t we just kill ’em?”

  6. It’s almost as if Virginia’s elites and dregs have allied themselves in a war on middle-class people and everything they believe in.

    1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      Yeah, like the sanctity of elections.

      1. Steve Haner Avatar
        Steve Haner

        Yeah, we should just pass a bill to let prison inmates vote, and then the Democrats would leave them locked up…..

        1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
          Nancy_Naive

          Well, that could work. But then, they’d be Republicans.

      2. “Yeah, like the sanctity of elections.” NN

        Indeed. Democrats need to respect the will of legal voters rather than trying to overturn election results using their slim majority in the House.

        “Democrats are challenging the results in two close House elections in Iowa and New York — and are represented by Marc Elias, the same attorney who led the party’s nationwide efforts to expand vote-by-mail.”

        “According to multiple reports, the Democrats plan to appeal to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the House Administration Committee to certify at least one of the candidates as the winners — even if the Republican candidate appears to have more votes as counted by state election authorities.”

        “Under the Federal Contested Elections Act, the House can step in and certify a winner in close and contested races. The Democrats last did so in 1985, when the House Administration Committee declared Rep. Frank McCloskey (D-IN) the winner of a close race in which his Republican challenger, Richard McIntyre, was certified as the winner by state election authorities. Democrats used their House majority to seat McCloskey and Republicans walked out of the chamber in protest.”

        https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/12/05/democrats-represented-by-marc-elias-try-to-overturn-two-house-elections-pelosi/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

        1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
          Nancy_Naive

          You’re right Nate. Let’s go with the Texas AG. Let’s toss those 4 states. Nobody gets those votes. This leaves the number of electoral votes to win as

          (538 – 20 -16 – 16 – 10)/2 = 238

          How many does Trump currently have from the remaining states? 232. Oopsy.

          1. As I have stated before, the most important consideration is not the outcome of one election, though that is very important. The problems with this election must be highlighted, acknowledged and rectified for future elections. Problems won’t go away by hiding them under a barrel and pretending they don’t exist.

            And what the Democrats are doing in with regard to Iowa and New York demonstrates that they are willing to do anything to win elections. Their moral posturing is a load of crap.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            Steve is an election worker. I think you should ask Steve if he thinks there is a way for an election to be perverted at the precinct level. I’d like to hear his answer also.

          3. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            Sadly, most know that this election was fair.
            Hey, it WAS a grand experiment. Nothing lasts forever.

          4. I heartily recommend reading primary sources such as the actual lawsuit filed with the Supreme Court linked above, but if you are interested in a shorter synopsis of what lead to this, here’s an article to read.

            There is no “Election Month” in the Constitution

            https://uncoverdc.com/2020/12/09/there-is-no-election-month-in-the-constitution/

          5. “Importantly, the Texas lawsuit presents a pure question of law. It is not dependent upon disputed facts. Although these unconstitutional changes to the election rules could have facilitated voter fraud, the State of Texas doesn’t need to prove a single case of fraud to win. It is enough that the four states violated the Constitution.”

            https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/07/kobach-texas-case-challenges-election-directly-at-supreme-court/

          6. LarrytheG Avatar

            Well aware Nathan and it’s going nowhere.

            IF there is actually a problem, why has it not been addressed before now?

            And if there is a problem, then we should reform.

            But we’re not going to throw out the results of the elections.

            That ship has sailed despite those who won’t believe it.

    2. Nancy_Naive Avatar
      Nancy_Naive

      They have a word for that, Jim. Bipartisanship.

    3. Transparency is the key. The more citizens know, the greater the likelihood of accountability.

      But information needs to be both available and easily accessible to the general public. It shouldn’t require a FOIA request to get this information.

      Here are some thoughts about potentially useful information. Is this kind of information available anywhere?

      -Stats on all who have received parole and percent who have committed crimes while on parole (with details of crimes committed)

      -Stats on those issued bond and percent who have committed crimes while out on bond (with details of crimes committed)

      -Stats on those issued pardons and percent who have subsequently committed crimes (with details of crimes committed)

      -Details of previous criminal history of everyone convicted of murder. Might sniffer penalties or some other intervention have potentially saved lives?

      For example, remember this? What’s the track record for these people and those pardoned by other governors?

      “Virginia’s McAuliffe to announce restoration of voting rights to 13,000 felons”

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/virginias-mcauliffe-to-announce-restoration-of-voting-rights-to-13000-felons/2016/08/20/590b43ee-6652-11e6-96c0-37533479f3f5_story.html

  7. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    Sarah was just a 15 year old kid. Last picture taken before prom. Strangled to death. You have to look at your victim in the eye to kill in this way.
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/lynchburg-family-asks-for-governor-to-intervene-in-parole-decision/ar-BB1bKSkl?fullscreen=true#image=1

    1. In the photo that was used of her after her death Sarah had a small smile. Her sister said it was because she was self-conscious about her braces. She was just a kid…

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead V

        Denied many of the great blessings that come in life. Denied falling in love, graduating, a career, marriage, a family of her own, and contributing to her community. Mr. Joyner has been deprived only of his freedom for the past 31 years.
        https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/84647774/sarah-jayne-jamison

  8. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    The Virginia Democratic Party’s most important constituencies are illegal immigrants and criminals. And they are extremely PO’d that 1 out of every 6 black men voted for Trump. A sizable number of Hispanic Americans and Americans of the Muslim faith.

  9. LarrytheG Avatar

    I’m trying to understand how someone who committed a crime like this – ever deserves to be paroled. Of all the complaints against Northam , this one is legitimate and I do not understand what the hell is going on with the parole board or Northam.

    This will, justifiably, hurt the Dems in Virginia. When you have folks who lean Dem see this, it changes minds.

  10. djrippert Avatar

    If the crime occurred in 1988 and the offender is 48 now I think that made him 16 at the time of the murder. Yes, it’s still a heinous and horrible crime but shouldn’t 16 year olds, even 16 year old murderers, have some chance at rehabilitation? What has he done while incarcerated? Do he now express remorse for his actions?

    One thing for sure – the parole board should be forced into a much more transparent process regarding releases. They should be forced to write the equivalent of a Supreme Court opinion as to why they are freeing a serious criminal. But “the Virginia Way” is nothing if not opaque. Heaven forbid our betters be asked to explain their actions – whether it is a parole board releasing a murderer or a governor imposing COVID-19 restrictions.

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      SCOTUS ruled that a mandatory life without parole for an offender under 18 constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Life sentences for these offenders must include the possibility of parole. However, that does not mean the state must grant parole.

      Given the parole board’s earlier findings about the convict, what magic happened to rehabilitate him in one year? Just more Democrats taking care of their important convicted criminal constituency.

      1. djrippert Avatar

        You may be right. I am suspicious of this action. However, something about the numbers quoted in the article seemed off. I realized that 1988 was a long time ago and the killer is only 48 right now. That’s what was bothering me.

        The parole board should be forced to justify its decisions for the public record. People should not have to guess why a murderer was freed.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          We agree on the lack of transparency. The complete record should be made available AND a public comment period for the victims and prosecuters. – All in one place.

          It’s a terrible thing to think someone would spend their entire life in a prison. In some respects, that IS inhumane but to have these people loose in society to kill and harm others is even less humane.

          But here is something that reflects on us as a society:

          https://i.imgur.com/URF0r7E.png

    2. LarrytheG Avatar

      I did not catch that and was led to believe that he had ” extensive criminal record,” a “history of violence,”

      So did he or not?

      I’m sure if Kerry said so, it’s true, right?

      1. djrippert Avatar

        He might have had a history of violence as a juvenile or he may have been violent in prison. When government entities like the parole board operate in darkness you just never know.

      2. Maybe Mr. Joyner was a “junior achiever”…

      3. Enjoy your sarcasm, Larry. The information about his “extensive criminal record” was a direct quote from the parole board’s comments at the time. Are you unaware that juveniles can have extensive criminal records?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          No. I know some do but I would like to know what it was other than “extensive”. Was it before prison? In prison, bad stuff can happen to people who do not want violence but have little choice sometimes.

          If this guy had a violent record prior to prison – then no sympathy at all .. the principal crime was bad enough.

          I’m agreeing with you Kerry. The parole board has gone rogue.

          1. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            And who says his record was violent? Stealing hubcaps?

          2. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            I think you’re dancing around the elephant in the room, Larry.
            16-year old boy rapes (conceded by me, unproven in court) and kills 15-year old in Virginia in late 1900s.

            Willing to bet $1 that, while uncommon, it ain’t as rare as hen’s teeth, and that these highly talented “opinion writers” could find maybe half dozen similar cases between, oh say, 1970 and 2000. More, if you let the ages wander +/- a bit.

            The question is, how many were tried as adults, and how many received such extensive sentences? How many have since been released? Had sentences reduced? Convictions overturned because of their age? Etc., etc.

            Then, too, a quick look at the perpetrator’s and victim’s photos lends a bit of a clue, too.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            Consistency in sentencing? Perhaps. It would help enormously if the full record of the guy as well as the proceedings of the parole board were available because the way this comes across – without that information – is arbitrary and capricious and it just plain looks wrong.

          4. Nancy_Naive Avatar
            Nancy_Naive

            Sentencing? Sure. But, even before sentencing, there was a decision to move from juvenile to adult court. These people (white conservatives and red queens) are a bloodthirsty lot and beginning about 1970 have sought to execute juveniles for crimes of this nature. “Life sentences for 12-year olds? Sure, but can’t we just kill ’em?”

  11. Nancy_Naive Avatar
    Nancy_Naive

    Robert Chambers

  12. LarrytheG Avatar

    The problem with the way they do it now, is that it is hard for an average person to understand the reasoning and rationale the parole board uses in making it’s decisions.

    Given what we have been given, we really do not well understand the how and why of the decision and that leads to people not really understanding it AND political issues.

    In this day and time, it’s really not acceptable for the parole board to operate in such an insular fashion. My opinion.

    Dick, as usual, is a voice of moderation and reason as well as providing more information about the process, so that, for instance, we really don’t know what the other “violence” was and no, it can’t be disqualifying in one session consideration and not so in the next.

    I just don’t think the parole board can operate the way it is without political issues resulting.

  13. Here’s another scandal. Do we really need to wait until this guy kills a carload of children before we put a stop to this? He had a second chance, a third chance, a forth chance…

    “Man facing 9th DUI conviction granted bond in Stafford”

    https://richmond.com/news/state-and-regional/man-facing-9th-dui-conviction-granted-bond-in-stafford/article_f7c3af45-fa69-542f-940e-92916b00f249.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1

  14. Nancy_Naive Avatar
    Nancy_Naive

    Robert Chambers

  15. LarrytheG Avatar

    The problem with the way they do it now, is that it is hard for an average person to understand the reasoning and rationale the parole board uses in making it’s decisions.

    Given what we have been given, we really do not well understand the how and why of the decision and that leads to people not really understanding it AND political issues.

    In this day and time, it’s really not acceptable for the parole board to operate in such an insular fashion. My opinion.

    Dick, as usual, is a voice of moderation and reason as well as providing more information about the process, so that, for instance, we really don’t know what the other “violence” was and no, it can’t be disqualifying in one session consideration and not so in the next.

    I just don’t think the parole board can operate the way it is without political issues resulting.

  16. Here’s another scandal. Do we really need to wait until this guy kills a carload of children before we put a stop to this? He had a second chance, a third chance, a forth chance…

    “Man facing 9th DUI conviction granted bond in Stafford”

    https://richmond.com/news/state-and-regional/man-facing-9th-dui-conviction-granted-bond-in-stafford/article_f7c3af45-fa69-542f-940e-92916b00f249.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1

Leave a Reply